Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
anonym_MX1pwwPpyK28

Angry Rant

29 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
1 post

Wargaming need to justify WTF they were thinking when they designed the Royal Navy Battleships. Designing the Cruisers to be extremely delicate was one thing, and when the french light cruisers came out with almost the same armour but somehow being less prone to multiple citadels I could almost forgive WG - after all they were just trying to make the nations different....

 

But battleships with HE that is better than the AP? With turret traverse that is absolutely awful? With armour and hitpoints that tend towards the low end at almost every tier? Constantly nerfing the heal, or the position of the citadel?

There is a point at which the aim ceases to be "differences in the tech trees" and becomes "we just don't like the Royal Navy"....

 

and that point comes when the Russian BB's are released! Almost every one of them is a fantasy mashup where the blueprints and schematics were interpreted in the most sympathetic way possible. Almost every one of them has something special and uniquely fun about them.... they have "poor turret traverse" (source: WG release notes) but compared to the RN turrets they are sliding along on a cloud of unicorn farts and stalin's [edited]tears. In real life the Soviet navy would struggle to put together a river monitor with a decent damage control party but no, in the game they are marvellous ships. In real life the Royal Navy was the biggest and best navy in the world, only surpassed by America in roughly 1942/43 - and yet in game the representation so far is a tree of BB's with the personality of a particularly stubborn  deodorant stain, a cruiser line that are designed for 1 role and don't do very well even in that one, and a destroyer line that have gimmick smoke and are only really good for harrassing/slightly annoying battleships on the flank with the guns.

 

 

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 6
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,485 posts
37,182 battles

You're trying to say that RN BBs are weak? :cap_fainting:

Dude they're really powerful when you know what are you doing. Especially T9-10 with mobster heal. Stay at distance and spam HE. When the battle goes on and you're closer and see broadside cruiser your swap to AP and delete him. Expert loader on RN BBs is a must for me. 

The only RN BB on high tiers that has pretty high citadel is the premium Vanguard. They still didn't raise the citadel of techtree higher tier BBs . It'll be on 0.8.6 so get ready for that. From T7-10 all BBs will have the same citadel height as vanguard one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TEC]
Beta Tester
199 posts

The Lion (UK) is the strongest tier 9 regular BB I've played so far.

 

To find something better, you'll have to leave the silver ships tech trees and get yourself a Missouri, Musashi, Jean Bart or similar - imo.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,485 posts
37,182 battles
7 minutes ago, thoso1973 said:

The Lion (UK) is the strongest tier 9 regular BB I've played so far.

 

To find something better, you'll have to leave the silver ships tech trees and get yourself a Missouri, Musashi, Jean Bart or similar - imo.

1v1 Lion is better than Missouri and JB. Can burn them to death if he knows what to do. Harder thing is with Musashi. Although Lion can burn him too, Musashi can punch RN BBs even angled. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
27,488 posts
14,584 battles
41 minutes ago, ShootingFish86 said:

Wargaming need to justify WTF they were thinking when they designed the Royal Navy Battleships. Designing the Cruisers to be extremely delicate was one thing, and when the french light cruisers came out with almost the same armour but somehow being less prone to multiple citadels I could almost forgive WG - after all they were just trying to make the nations different....

 

But battleships with HE that is better than the AP? With turret traverse that is absolutely awful? With armour and hitpoints that tend towards the low end at almost every tier? Constantly nerfing the heal, or the position of the citadel?

There is a point at which the aim ceases to be "differences in the tech trees" and becomes "we just don't like the Royal Navy"....

 

and that point comes when the Russian BB's are released! Almost every one of them is a fantasy mashup where the blueprints and schematics were interpreted in the most sympathetic way possible. Almost every one of them has something special and uniquely fun about them.... they have "poor turret traverse" (source: WG release notes) but compared to the RN turrets they are sliding along on a cloud of unicorn farts and stalin's [edited]tears. In real life the Soviet navy would struggle to put together a river monitor with a decent damage control party but no, in the game they are marvellous ships. In real life the Royal Navy was the biggest and best navy in the world, only surpassed by America in roughly 1942/43 - and yet in game the representation so far is a tree of BB's with the personality of a particularly stubborn  deodorant stain, a cruiser line that are designed for 1 role and don't do very well even in that one, and a destroyer line that have gimmick smoke and are only really good for harrassing/slightly annoying battleships on the flank with the guns.

Oh boy. That sounds like someone needs a heavy dose of L2P.

Especially the DD are very good.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,485 posts
37,182 battles
16 minutes ago, GarrusBrutus said:

Tier 7 and 8 are kinda mehhhhhhhhhhh. Not really good at anything really. 

T7 ? I really had fun on it. The Duke of York is nothing to talk about , with 5 sec longer reload and worse rudder. The only advantage is hydro and slightly better AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TEC]
Beta Tester
199 posts

The UK dds are generally speaking pretty solid and multi purpose ships.

 

I'd say that if the UK tech tree has a 'problem', it's with the cruisers and their lack of HE ammo. That is a disadvantage that robs you of several tactical and strategic options and I'm not sure that the increased RoF you get in return, is worth the trade off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
10,375 posts
9,122 battles
Just now, thoso1973 said:

The UK dds are generally speaking pretty solid and multi purpose ships.

 

I'd say that if the UK tech tree has a 'problem', it's with the cruisers and their lack of HE ammo. That is a disadvantage that robs you of several tactical and strategic options and I'm not sure that the increased RoF you get in return, is worth the trade off.

 

WG said, smoke shooting HE is OP (see Belfast and Kutuzov) so no HE for RN CLs. That was again reserved for Russian bias Smolensk :cap_tea:

But i like my AP only CLs :Smile_playing:

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BLITZ]
Players
2,837 posts
11,209 battles
2 hours ago, MacArthur92 said:

T7 ? I really had fun on it. The Duke of York is nothing to talk about , with 5 sec longer reload and worse rudder. The only advantage is hydro and slightly better AA.

Autobounce-angles?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,717 posts
8,980 battles
5 hours ago, GarrusBrutus said:

Tier 7 and 8 are kinda mehhhhhhhhhhh. Not really good at anything really. 

and KGV is my favorite from that line too :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
14,158 posts
20,118 battles

I could make an angry rant about how underperforming players like you should be forced out of high tiers but that would get me banned.

That you need to l2p ofc never crossed your mind?

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 3
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FABER]
[FABER]
Players
617 posts
6,307 battles
49 minuti fa, MacArthur92 ha scritto:

It's the same hull as KGV.

 

Yeah, but Duke of York has improved penetration angles like USA cruisers at 67,5 degrees instead of 60, so her AP are more dangerous against cruisers compared to standard UK AP... 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
14,158 posts
20,118 battles
9 minutes ago, Bics93 said:

Yeah, but Duke of York has improved penetration angles like USA cruisers at 67,5 degrees instead of 60, so her AP are more dangerous against cruisers compared to standard UK AP... 

 

Tbh I never knew that. Had to check Fitting Tool to confirm.

Learn something new every day.

You know.

Unlike the OP.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,485 posts
37,182 battles
7 minutes ago, Bics93 said:

 

Yeah, but Duke of York has improved penetration angles like USA cruisers at 67,5 degrees instead of 60, so her AP are more dangerous against cruisers compared to standard UK AP... 

I didn't know that . Ty :cap_like:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FABER]
[FABER]
Players
617 posts
6,307 battles
3 minuti fa, El2aZeR ha scritto:

 

Tbh I never knew that. Had to check Fitting Tool to confirm.

Learn something new every day.

You know.

Unlike the OP.

 

1 minuto fa, MacArthur92 ha scritto:

I didn't know that . Ty :cap_like:

 

When you know that, those 4,5seconds of reload have much more sense in my opinion... 

 

Also DoY will receive another repair party charge in next patch, so you won’t have anymore a heal disadvantage compared to KGV... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
3,067 posts
10,914 battles

The Soviet BBs being better is just the same as with the French.  Powercreep.  WG want you to think that the newer lines are superior to the ones you own so you'll grind them. Simple logic to them.

 

As for RN BBs being weak, aside from tier VIII I found them fine.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BS4]
Players
1,348 posts
7,467 battles
11 hours ago, ShootingFish86 said:

 

But battleships with HE that is better than the AP?

Strong HE as well as good AP ...How the hell is this a bad thing ?

Strong heal as well as a super heal on some premium ships (Nelson)

 

problem sounds like its coming from behind the keyboard not with the line tbh.....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
Players
2,482 posts
10,120 battles
5 hours ago, ___V_E_N_O_M___ said:

and KGV is my favorite from that line too :(

I don't know why but out of all tier 7 bbs that is my least favorite. Accuracy is meh and can't tank a lot since litteraly everyone can pen you no matter the angle. Scharn, Colorado, nagato and gneisenau work better for me. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,279 posts
19,066 battles
11 hours ago, ShootingFish86 said:

Wargaming need to justify WTF they were thinking when they designed the Royal Navy Battleships. Designing the Cruisers to be extremely delicate was one thing, and when the french light cruisers came out with almost the same armour but somehow being less prone to multiple citadels I could almost forgive WG - after all they were just trying to make the nations different....

 

But battleships with HE that is better than the AP? With turret traverse that is absolutely awful? With armour and hitpoints that tend towards the low end at almost every tier? Constantly nerfing the heal, or the position of the citadel?

There is a point at which the aim ceases to be "differences in the tech trees" and becomes "we just don't like the Royal Navy"....

 

and that point comes when the Russian BB's are released! Almost every one of them is a fantasy mashup where the blueprints and schematics were interpreted in the most sympathetic way possible. Almost every one of them has something special and uniquely fun about them.... they have "poor turret traverse" (source: WG release notes) but compared to the RN turrets they are sliding along on a cloud of unicorn farts and stalin's [edited]tears. In real life the Soviet navy would struggle to put together a river monitor with a decent damage control party but no, in the game they are marvellous ships. In real life the Royal Navy was the biggest and best navy in the world, only surpassed by America in roughly 1942/43 - and yet in game the representation so far is a tree of BB's with the personality of a particularly stubborn  deodorant stain, a cruiser line that are designed for 1 role and don't do very well even in that one, and a destroyer line that have gimmick smoke and are only really good for harrassing/slightly annoying battleships on the flank with the guns.

 

 

citadel is getting the position where it should be. underwater citadel makes the ships tardproof and this is dumb. besides rising the citadel is only gonna affect [edited] who shows broadside in them. 

 

nerfing the heal?`what are you talking about? that heal is already stupid AF and its getting buffed... :Smile_facepalm:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AMOK]
Players
1,965 posts
8,654 battles

Sounds like serious teaabo, l2p issues :Smile_sceptic: After KGV i paused the grind because of its silly and completely unfun gameplay but surely not because they are weak. :Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
[THESO]
Players
2,645 posts
24,372 battles

ah, i see... we're talking the latest addition to the game ^^......

 

 

Spoiler

:Smile_facepalm: BOOOORING..... next plz!

edit:

oh, i see we do indeed lol.... #rusBBthreadindisguise:Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×